* Re: (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
@ 2003-11-26 19:53 Richard Kenner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Richard Kenner @ 2003-11-26 19:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: charlet; +Cc: gcc
I'd suggest to let Richard (Kenner) have a look at this issue before
making any change.
At one point it was needed, then there was a GCC change that caused it to
no longer work, so it was commented out. I'm not convinced either way at
the moment: that we do or don't need that hook. My preference is to wait
until we resolve more of the GNAT test failures before making a definitive
judgement that it isn't needed, though at this point I'm leaning in
the direction that we don't, in fact, need it.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
2003-11-26 18:58 ` Arnaud Charlet
2003-11-26 19:00 ` Geert Bosch
@ 2003-11-27 4:29 ` aspiesrule
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: aspiesrule @ 2003-11-27 4:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnaud Charlet; +Cc: gcc
What is Richard Kenner's e-mail address?
Arnaud Charlet <charlet@ACT-Europe.FR> said:
> > For GNAT, any commented out code (this includes #if 0 ...#endif) should
> > be removed, unless there is a comment marked with ???, explaining why
> > the code is there and why it is commented out.
>
> The issue is not to remove commented out code, but to remove all references
> to gnat_adjust_rli itself.
>
> I'd suggest to let Richard (Kenner) have a look at this issue before
> making any change.
>
> Arno
>
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
2003-11-26 18:41 ` Geert Bosch
2003-11-26 18:58 ` Arnaud Charlet
@ 2003-11-27 4:23 ` aspiesrule
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: aspiesrule @ 2003-11-27 4:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Bosch; +Cc: gcc
There is a comment marked with ???.
Lucas
Geert Bosch <bosch@gnat.com> said:
>
> On Nov 26, 2003, at 12:03, <aspiesrule@mcleodusa.net> wrote:
>
> > Considering that the entire body of this function is enclosed in a #if
> > 0...#endif block, why is it needed?
>
> For GNAT, any commented out code (this includes #if 0 ...#endif) should
> be removed, unless there is a comment marked with ???, explaining why
> the code
> is there and why it is commented out.
>
> Failing that, a patch to remove the code in question is pre-approved.
>
> -Geert
>
>
--
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
2003-11-26 18:58 ` Arnaud Charlet
@ 2003-11-26 19:00 ` Geert Bosch
2003-11-27 4:29 ` aspiesrule
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Geert Bosch @ 2003-11-26 19:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnaud Charlet; +Cc: gcc, Richard Kenner, aspiesrule
On Nov 26, 2003, at 12:50, Arnaud Charlet wrote:
> The issue is not to remove commented out code, but to remove all
> references
> to gnat_adjust_rli itself.
>
> I'd suggest to let Richard (Kenner) have a look at this issue before
> making any change.
Also, this code does have a proper ??? comment.
#if 0
/* ??? This code seems to have no actual effect; record_align should
already
reflect the largest alignment desired by a field. jason
2003-04-01 */
...
Richard, could you clean this up now?
-Geert
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
2003-11-26 18:41 ` Geert Bosch
@ 2003-11-26 18:58 ` Arnaud Charlet
2003-11-26 19:00 ` Geert Bosch
2003-11-27 4:29 ` aspiesrule
2003-11-27 4:23 ` aspiesrule
1 sibling, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Arnaud Charlet @ 2003-11-26 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Bosch; +Cc: aspiesrule, gcc
> For GNAT, any commented out code (this includes #if 0 ...#endif) should
> be removed, unless there is a comment marked with ???, explaining why
> the code is there and why it is commented out.
The issue is not to remove commented out code, but to remove all references
to gnat_adjust_rli itself.
I'd suggest to let Richard (Kenner) have a look at this issue before
making any change.
Arno
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
[not found] <20031126170244.D1603F2DDD@nile.gnat.com>
@ 2003-11-26 18:41 ` Geert Bosch
2003-11-26 18:58 ` Arnaud Charlet
2003-11-27 4:23 ` aspiesrule
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Geert Bosch @ 2003-11-26 18:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: aspiesrule; +Cc: gcc
On Nov 26, 2003, at 12:03, <aspiesrule@mcleodusa.net> wrote:
> Considering that the entire body of this function is enclosed in a #if
> 0...#endif block, why is it needed?
For GNAT, any commented out code (this includes #if 0 ...#endif) should
be removed, unless there is a comment marked with ???, explaining why
the code
is there and why it is commented out.
Failing that, a patch to remove the code in question is pre-approved.
-Geert
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore?
@ 2003-11-26 17:50 aspiesrule
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: aspiesrule @ 2003-11-26 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc
Considering that the entire body of this function is enclosed in a #if
0...#endif block, why is it needed?
Lucas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-11-27 1:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-11-26 19:53 (GNAT) Do we need misc.c:gnat_adjust_rli anymore? Richard Kenner
[not found] <20031126170244.D1603F2DDD@nile.gnat.com>
2003-11-26 18:41 ` Geert Bosch
2003-11-26 18:58 ` Arnaud Charlet
2003-11-26 19:00 ` Geert Bosch
2003-11-27 4:29 ` aspiesrule
2003-11-27 4:23 ` aspiesrule
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-11-26 17:50 aspiesrule
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).